If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. For the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the state.
-Dr. Joseph Goebbels
Uncommon Sense Today
Due to natural circumstances gliding through the natural order of things we now know the names of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. Depending on perspective, these respective men are deemed either enemies or heroes. It is my opinion, that in order to arrive at those conclusions, one must first make a decision on what they did. And what these two men did were to disclose government activities that were meant to remain a secret. But in a constitutional republic built on the principles of individual sovereignty, why would it be necessary for the people serving the people to perform acts that required secrecy?
It might be painful for those in uniform (military or law enforcement) to engage these disclosures. It might be painful or embarrassing for those who work in the federal government of the United States to engage these disclosures of government activities as well. But it would be difficult if not impossible for a passer-by to ascertain the true feelings of these aforementioned people by their actions or body language. As a matter of fact, one could come to the conclusion that the American government employee condones these said actions perpetrated by the United States government.
Before we go any further, let us deal with the term government or state. In sociology there is a subset called Group Dynamics. Although academia may use or teach Group Dynamics in different manifestations; it was originally meant to discover the pathology of the individual by observing and measuring their actions within the abstraction called the “Group”. This was based on the theories of the Rorschach Ink Blot tests. The premise being that as the individual could project themselves on abstract ink formations, the same behavior pattern could be manifested within a group dynamic. The individual could perform certain things and take no responsibility for them as they projected the cause upon the group. The group relieved the individual of any wrong doing by removing the line of sight from cause to effect.
The term “Group” could mean family, county, corporation, country, club, unit, division, or any number of things currently used to describe a collection of people joined for a single or multiple purposes. Often times, when studied in great detail, even the most complex Groups can be atomized to a single core or nucleus goal: the one thing all participants want at some level that keeps the Group together.
So, if the government is a Group, then what exactly do the men and women currently working for the United States government want? What is their goal?
If the media is another group, then what exactly do the men and women currently working within journalism want? What do the owners of the media want? What is their goal?
Guardians and the last check on Power
It has been argued in classrooms around America since our beginning who is the author of this country? Thomas Jefferson…James Madison…Alexander Hamilton…John Adams…
The consensus usually finds its way to one man: Thomas Jefferson. It is a logical choice, and one that makes perfect sense with empirical data to back up the claim. The others mentioned most definitely played crucial roles in our development as a nation. But for myself and a few others we choose another Thomas: Thomas Paine. Most arrive at Paine due to his discourse to the common man through his work “Common Sense”. I am not going to repeat that work here, but to simply acknowledge what most people acknowledge: Thomas Paine, on paper, stoked the fires of revolution as to inspire the colonist to revolution.
The colonies were used to the wit of Benjamin Franklin and Olympian prose of Thomas Jefferson. The colonies were used to the thunder of Patrick Henry and John Adams. But it was Thomas Paine who most endeared the colonies to the idea of revolution. And it was the mode of this discourse that found its way into the Constitution.
In the entire document, which is not exactly a long read in its original form or its current form, there is only one non-governmental occupation mentioned: journalism. You can find it referenced as the Freedom of the press. And free is the key word as the founding fathers subsidized the press as to make the newspapers free to all with no conditionals as to content. The newspapers could publish whatever they wanted to as long as they did not charge for the newspaper. It was war. And this was a new kind of war for a new kind of nation. This was news wrapped in emotivism and sensationalism as to move people. This was much more than writing about crop harvests or whose house had burned down. This was a newspaper publication meant with one thing in mind: revolution.
The founding fathers knew how powerful the newspapers were prior and during the revolutionary war. But as an unofficial check on the machine which would become the United States government, it was left to the journalist to dig deep and listen to the shadows in order to uncover corruption, cronyism, and political games of power. This is the reason there is no Department of Journalism stated in the Constitution. The newspapers and those that worked for them had only one mandate: Truth. And to seek out this truth would take the greatest courage of all; more courage than a President; more Courage than a Supreme Court Justice; more courage than a speaker of the house; more courage than a soldier on the frontline.
The journalist had to report on Americans serving Americans who might be serving themselves along the way. The journalist had to report about backroom deals and monies exchanged under tables. The journalist had to report on political rent seeking and log rolling. And the journalist had to do all of this in an environment which reeked of a constant perfume of corrupting the pen and the heart of the journalist.
The journalist had to stave off attempt after attempt of favors for looking away or losing proof. The journalist had no choice but to work in the mire of government gardens of power. The journalist had to acknowledge their own reality: it is unhealthy to fight the machine, but it is better to die a journalist than live as a propagandist.
Manufactured Perceptions
In 1996 President Bill Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act which allowed corporations to purchase and own media outlets. This meant that it was legal for a corporation to own all the media outlets in a domain or region. So General Electric could buy NBC, and Disney could buy ABC, and Viacom could buy CBS.
This deregulation also marked a change in government attitude as it noted access to the world wide web. There was major concern over the ownership of the internet. If the corporations could buy major news outlets, then they could control what was news and when it was news. The internet was brand new and an unknown variable. No one could really comprehend its affect on people’s perceptions of events when they were seen on the same screen as their latest term paper or email. It was left entirely up to the viewer.
The American people were running out of pure fountains of drinkable information about domestic and worldly events. This legislation made major news outlets portals for entertainment and opinionated talking heads. And these opinions were biased towards the events taking place at home and around the world. In some cases you might get someone’s “take” on the event before the viewer could get all the facts about the event itself.
The eventual speed allotted by the internet made checking references and sources an antiquated form of journalism. With almost immediate real time access to events the portal to this access made all the difference.
The Telecommunications Act removed journalism from an open recruitment center for guardians, but rather, a producer of the next big thing. The viewer had no choice but to be told how and what to feel about the event through the delivery of the event.
If the people wanted blood, then they got blood.
If the people wanted a hero, then they got a hero.
If the people wanted a puppy, then they got a puppy.
The entire practice of journalism had become one giant format of advertising.
He was a revolutionary
In 1971, in the town of Media, Pennsylvania; a group called Citizens’ Commission to investigate the FBI broke into a FBI office and stole over a thousand files of classified information. They sent the files to several news outlets, but no one wanted to publish them in fear of retribution by the FBI.
Unknown to the members of the group, they had uncovered the most UnAmerican program since the Woodrow Wilson presidency: it was called COINTELPRO.
COINTELPRO officially existed from 1956 to 1971. It was born out of a fear of communism in America, but it became something much more horrific. It was more treacherous than any other government program in the 20th century. It resembled the activities of the Gestapo.
COINTELPRO actually stood for Counter Intelligence Program. Its main agenda was to gather information and disrupt the communist sympathizers throughout the American landscape. It kept growing and growing as the FBI found new enemies to investigate. The main problem with COINTELPRO was that it operated outside the guidelines of the law. Its members would eventually wiretap, give false testimony, wrongly incarcerate people, and eventually kill several members of groups that were seen as enemies of America. No group suffered more from the actions of COINTELPRO operators than the Black Panthers.
Disclosure of actions taken by members of COINTELPRO would eventually admit to threatening Martin Luther King Jr. just prior to his acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize. It was also discovered that, with the aid of local law enforcement officers, that operators within COINTELPRO orchestrated the killings of several Black Panther Party leaders. One of these leaders was named Fred Hampton.
Fred Hampton was young, intelligent, caring, and most of all a very powerful speaker. He was the Deputy Chairman of the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party. He was considered a supreme organizer and was inspiring a merger between two separate groups which would almost double the size of the Black Panther Party in Illinois. Fred Hampton was so good at his work that he was deemed dangerous by the FBI. The members of COINTELPRO joined the Chicago Police Department in orchestrating a raid on Hampton’s apartment in which Fred Hampton was shot several times in front of his fiancée, and then dragged away as to allow the Chicago Police Officers to shoot him two more times in the head.
The Media, Pennsylvania break-in uncovered a paper trail that tied COINTELPRO operators to the killing of Fred Hampton. The break-in at Media disclosed that they had a detailed map of Hampton’s apartment as well as documentation to disconnect the FBI from the Chicago Police Department during this time.
The FBI is made up of men and women that consider themselves Americans. These Americans believe in law, order, and due process. J. Edgar Hoover decided who was an American and who was an enemy. It is unlikely that George Washington would’ve authorized such a government program.
The Church Committee initiated by Senator Frank Church of Idaho began the arduous task of lifting the veil of secrecy around the American intelligence community which included the National Security Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigations, and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Fred Hampton had been dead for six years before the hearings started.
Cracked in the center, twice
The story first ran in the San Jose Mercury under the title of “Dark Alliance”. It was a year long endeavor by a reporter named Gary Webb. The premise of the three part series dealt with the connection between crack cocaine use in Los Angles, California and the Contras of Nicaragua. The story’s main antagonist would be the CIA. Gary Webb had found a connection between two very large drug dealers in Los Angeles and their relationship to the Contras fighting the Sandinistas. The two drug dealers seemed to be getting product and protection from a higher power. Gary Webb believed he had found that higher power.
The story became a problem when Webb was able to prove that the CIA was turning the other cheek in regards to the drug trafficking of crack cocaine, because it was quite clear that the Contras were being funded by the sale of the illegal drug. Its largest customer base was the United States of America. American foreign policy was indirectly affecting the lives of Americans at home. The greatest victim of this alliance was the African American.
It started out innocent enough. Gary Webb was sent out to answer a question: where did all of the crack cocaine in Los Angeles come from? The reason for the question was due to the damage done to the African American communities. Families were being torn apart as one or both parents went to prison for long periods of time. Property in those areas known as crack havens went into permanent decline. The residuals of drug use became noticeable almost right away: homelessness, property theft, prostitution, spread of STDs, and an overall break down of the African American quality of life. Crack cocaine destroyed everything it touched.
At first the series didn’t register on the big radars of other major print media. But eventually it did, and when it did, the windfall appeared to never end. The African American community protested and wanted answers. Eventually there would be congressional hearings about the relationships involved.
Dark Alliance was also the first major media piece to have an internet presence. The San Jose Mercury put up a website devoted just to the series. At its apex, the site had one million hits a day. But the fervor caused by the story quickly turned on its author.
The rebuff started in Webb’s own field. Other major print media began questioning Webb’s reporting. They then began to tear into the heart of the series. Many doubted Webb’s sources as reliable, and then they went directly after Webb himself questioning his professionalism as a journalist. The backlash became so severe that the San Jose Mercury recanted and admitted that there were editing issues that they should’ve identified right away which would’ve kept the series from running. Gary Webb went from hero to zero even in his own yard. His own paper refused to back his work.
The CIA only worked with media outlets willing to strike out at Webb’s story. And it was true that the story did have problems, but that is what the media focused on: the logistical aspect of writing, rather than the core of the story line itself. The CIA were inadvertently aiding in the sale of crack cocaine in southern California and didn’t seem to care enough to do anything about it as long as the outcome of Nicaragua was undecided.
Gary Webb was now a pawn in a game he was never going to win. His life was never to be the same again. The story ran in August of 1996. It was about 20,000 words long. And although Webb would defend his work, he himself would eventually lose everything. With the backlash in full fire the San Jose Mercury let him go. Webb did write two books about Dark Alliance and his life after Dark Alliance. He eventually found work in the California State Legislature, as a freelance writer, and took a post at an alternative newspaper.
On December 10th, 2004 Gary Webb was found with two gun shots to his head. It was ruled a suicide. When the CIA and the major media print outlets took his credibility, they took his life. Two shots…one dead journalist. One more dead guardian.
It should’ve been the Turkey
With a topic such as modern media there can really be no conclusion or end to the discussion. This post is no different. But I would remind the reader of a few things before we depart.
America was founded as a constitutional republic based on individual sovereignty. Many of the early amendments found in the Bill of Rights were a reaction to what the British took away or censored from the colonists. Journalism is the only non-governmental occupation noted in the constitution. The journalist was to be the final check on those who had ascended into the halls of power; a power which was to remain forever in the hands of the people.
To prove that the power has mutated into a deformed mass of deceit and dishonor would not take long; which is why America needs a new legion of journalist with intellect, honor, and courage. The readers must rebirth a concern for the truth and seek it out at every opportunity. The thing that is missing from America is nobility; for those in power are in the muck of bovine defecation, and they are taking us, the constitution, and the Liberty with them.
Our Liberty depends on Freedom of the Press, and that cannot be limited without being lost. Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe.
-Thomas Jefferson
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Israel: the state of America
Imagine a person who believes that everything they do is cool; that everything that do is popular and necessary. This belief is projected upon everyone around them. Although there is no empirical data to support this belief, the person continues this belief through their own behavior with little or no awareness of reality. This belief does not require confirmation or reinforcement.
In psychology this phenomena is known at a meta-perception. The more inaccurate the perception, the more probability of negative consequences for that person and those around them.
Birthday Presents for a new self
1783-Treaty of Paris. The former Colonies become the United States of America.
1803-Louisiana Purchase. The largest land acquisition in US history. Purchased from France.
1845-Texas was annexed from an independent republic.
1867-Alaska was purchased from Russia.
1898-Hawaiian Islands were annexed from an independent republic.
1898-Puerto Rico was annexed from Spain after war.
1917-Virgin Islands were purchased from Denmark.
Official and Legitimate on Paper
As one could imagine those appointed map makers for the United States were kept busy, and maybe even annoyed at the rate of growth of this new nation; this experiment not meant to last, but last it did. And like all growing boys, its growth affected others as well as itself. This maturation had consequences. It is always awkward to grow up especially if you want to be cool.
And of course, with being known as a country of law, there must be a legitimate form of becoming official. For example, the above mentioned land known to us as Alaska was not made an official state until January 3, 1959. Hawaii was not legitimate until August 21 of that same year.
Now, most Americans recall their American History classes in Junior High and High School. They remember about the wars that set men free and the price the country paid for that freedom. Sure, the calculations were passed over as just words in a text book, but the teachers did what they could to emphasize the importance of such sacrifice in the face of such enemies. Enemies of Freedom.
And another given, most Americans will tell you with little or no hesitation that their are 50 states in this Union along with a few other territories like American Samoa, Guam, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
But if one were focused and thorough, one would realize that their was a secret state of the Union. Not so much a secret as the word is defined and used today, rather an open and prideful secret. Almost a secret on purpose if so inclined.
This particular secret state of America was legitimately born on May 14, 1948 with a signature from Harry Truman; the then President of the United States of America.
A side dish of History in the Land of God and biblical promises
October 1915-The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence: this was an official agreement between the Arabs of the Middle Eastern Land of Palestine and the British Government. It promised that if the Arabs fought the Turks, then the Arabs would enjoy self-rule.
May 1916-The Sykes-Picot Agreement: this is a proposal that separates the lands of Arabia into pockets that are controlled by the United Kingdom, France, and Russia at the end of World War I. This is identified as a step away from the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence.
November 1917-The Balfour Declaration: this is a document authored by the United Kingdom stating that within the lands identified as Palestine every effort would be taken to establish a homeland for the Jewish people. This is identified as a complete reversal of the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence. This is the beginning of Arab dissent with British officials.
1918-1923: The Russian revolution decimates the Jewish population and forces hundreds of thousands to flee. Over 40,000 Jews arrive in Palestine.
1932-1939: Due to Nazi control in Germany and Europe over 200,000 Jews arrive in Palestine.
1936-1939: Arabs begin to revolt against British rule and Jewish immigrants. This forces the British to begin to change immigration laws pertaining to Jewish population and refugee status.
November 1947: The United Nations officially partition the Palestinian land into two states: one for Jews and one for Arabs. It is rejected by the Arabs on the grounds that the Arab was there first. This triggers a civil war between Jews and Arab forces.
American Exceptionalism Manifested
There have been apologies in perpetuity for the atrocities that took place during the holocaust of World War II. Theory after theory and explanation after explanation have tried in vain to appease those looking for a plausible answer as to why it happened. The conclusion we now have is that there are things we do to each other that cannot be explained and things that cannot be apologized for.
In short, the human is the worst animal this planet will ever suffer to exist.
Those things that took place at Treblinka and Birkenau are too horrific to comprehend beyond the truth that they can never be allowed to be repeated. We, as a specie, cannot allow that kind of cleansing to ever happen again.
This point is never argued. If there is any certainty to history or to our own interpretations, it is to acknowledge this point over and over: the holocaust and anything remotely similar cannot happen again.
So, from this axiom, we must find our savior. We must identify the one who will carry the sword and hold fast the shield and stand at the ready at the walls to guarantee safety for all. We must identify the steward, sentinel, and guardsmen for this dangerous but noble task.
In natural selection, there is nothing unnatural about being the alpha when proof is afforded to the entire kingdom. When their speed, agility, senses, strength, and power set the standard it is their place to operate as they see fit. But when the alpha no longer exhibits those superior traits of brain and brawn what does nature tell us to do with the alpha?
Pathology of being Wrong
Legal: According to the 4th Geneva Convention, the occupation of Palestine by Israel is illegal. The Hague has even ruled against Israel on this matter.
Israel is the number 1 violator of United Nations Security Resolutions. In their defense, the United States has used its veto in the UN security council over forty times when Israel was found at fault as to keep them from being punished.
According to the 4th Geneva Convention, an occupier cannot build roads, walls, checkpoints, or do anything that would place the occupied people in peril. Currently, Israel has built a wall twice as high as the Berlin Wall and 4 times as long in Palestine. It also has over one hundred checkpoints that regulate the movement of Palestinian people from work, school, and medical. These are also all illegal according to the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to restrict the mobility of occupied people.
Since 1967, over 18,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished due to Jewish settlements being built. These settlements are also illegal.
In 2005, Israel finally gave into international law and evacuated settlements in Gaza and dismantled their military presence. This evacuation only made up 2% of the total population of Jews. The Israeli government told each settler that was evacuated that they would receive $227,000 US dollars in order to relocate. The total cost of this venture would be 2.2 billion USD. The Israeli government requested that the United States pay for all of this.
Source: Council on Foreign Relations.
1948-Palestinian Refugee population: 750,000
Today-Palestinian Refugee population: 4.6 million
Source: U.N. High Commission for refugees.
Economic: According to the World Bank, the Palestinian unemployment rate is over 50%. The Palestinian poverty is at 75% which means these people live on $2 a day or less.
Military: The United States sees Israel as a military pawn in the Middle East.
"We consider 30 billion in assistance to Israel as an investment in Peace...through strength".
Nicholas Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs
Source: Congressional Research Service (U.S. aid to Israel)
2007-10 year Military aid agreement signed by George W. Bush which guarantees 10 billion in USD.
2014-Israel is the 5th largest nuclear power in the world with 200 to 300 active nuclear warheads.
2010-Israel number of tanks: 3,930 Israel number of F-16 Jets 362 (second largest fleet behind U.S.)
Palestinian number of tanks: 0 Palestinian number of Jets: 0
Source: Global Security.com
2000-2nd Intifada: The Israeli response was disproportional. According to Palestine Red Crescent Society, in the first ten days 74 Palestinians were killed and another 3,000 were injured. According to Amnesty international the Palestinians were denied medical attention. This is illegal according to the Geneva convention.
September 2000 to February 2007
Palestinians killed by Israelis=4,009
Israelis killed by Palestinians=1,021
Children killed during conflict: Palestinian=816
Israeli=119
Source: B'Tselem.
According to Jeremy Sharp, Congressional Research Service, June 2015
Multi-Tiered Missile Defense Shield includes Iron Dome, David's Sling, Arrow I, Arrow II, and Arrow III. These are all funded and provided for by the United States.
Cash Flow Financing allows Israel to purchase US armaments with "special loans" over an extended time period. This is unique to Military purchases only.
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Cost per plane=2.75 Billion USD
The United States allows Israel to purchase this fighter jet through a 100% FMF grant.
Q.M.E. (Qualitative Military Edge) is a program wherein the United States aids Israel in setting up a defense armament centric economy through arms manufacturing. From 2010 to 2014 Israel was the number 10 exporter of armaments around the world making up 2% of aggregate sales delivered.
Strategic Collaboration: this was a program initiated in the 1980's wherein the United States would secretly stockpile weapons in case of emergencies in Israel. Israel, while attacking Gaza, requested and was awarded access to Hellfire missiles taken directly from this stockpile of emergency weapons. Although there were a few hiccups from congress, the use of the missiles were allowed. But it was made clear that the program was not meant as a "shared" stockpile.
Financial: Israel is acknowledged as dependent upon aid from the United States at home and abroad. Its economy, since its birth, had always been lagging behind its population growth.
1/3 of all aid given out by the United States goes to Israel.
From 1949 to 2006 aid to Israel reached 108 billion. That is 2 to 3 billion a year or 6 to 8 million a day.
Religious: From 1978 to 2006 Pro-Israeli Political Action Committees have contributed $43,724,035 USD to candidates who vote in congress according to The American Israel Public Affairs Committee. This group is based on the beliefs of the fundamentalist Christian. They support Israel per the last book of the bible, Revelations.
Conclusion
To enable someone is only human. It is psychologically unhealthy, but it happens all the time all over the world. The American voter is no different than those in Europe, the Pacific rim, Russia, or even Scandinavia. It doesn't matter where you are from, but it does matter how you behave. It does matter what you apply in your own life.
Imagine you have fallen into a deep pit. We call this deep pit; cliché.
A. Either you stand for or you stand against or you stand in line
B. Either you are the problem or the solution
C. I didn't have anyone to vote for or I didn't want to throw away my vote
D. I am not addicted. I can quit any time.
E. No one can love me the way he can. These bruises and broken collar bone are my fault. I am the one to blame for his drinking. Non one can love me the way he can.
As Israel occupies Palenstinians lands, so to does the United States occupy the world. The connectionism between Israel and America lies within this relationship. The reason Americans support Israel is not to make amends for the atrocities of the Holocaust; it is rather to allow Israel to commit its own kind of Holocaust. As the German blamed the Jew for losing WWI and its German identity, the Jew now blames the Arab for the same.
This post is not anti-Semitic or anti-American. It is simply an observation of a very large group of junkies.
The United States sees itself in Israel. God ordained this land to the Jew as God ordained the world to the American. It is that simple. It is that dangerous.
Occupation is the key to disaster, pain, and suffering. It will be up to the American to evolve beyond such activities as these. As a nation of law, we know that law that is not applied does not exist.
It is now time for the American voter to break away from the pack and break free from their addiction. But only the addict can help the addict.
Either the American can be cool or the American can be right. No junkie can be both. The first step is dealing with reality.
Peace
In psychology this phenomena is known at a meta-perception. The more inaccurate the perception, the more probability of negative consequences for that person and those around them.
Birthday Presents for a new self
1783-Treaty of Paris. The former Colonies become the United States of America.
1803-Louisiana Purchase. The largest land acquisition in US history. Purchased from France.
1845-Texas was annexed from an independent republic.
1867-Alaska was purchased from Russia.
1898-Hawaiian Islands were annexed from an independent republic.
1898-Puerto Rico was annexed from Spain after war.
1917-Virgin Islands were purchased from Denmark.
Official and Legitimate on Paper
As one could imagine those appointed map makers for the United States were kept busy, and maybe even annoyed at the rate of growth of this new nation; this experiment not meant to last, but last it did. And like all growing boys, its growth affected others as well as itself. This maturation had consequences. It is always awkward to grow up especially if you want to be cool.
And of course, with being known as a country of law, there must be a legitimate form of becoming official. For example, the above mentioned land known to us as Alaska was not made an official state until January 3, 1959. Hawaii was not legitimate until August 21 of that same year.
Now, most Americans recall their American History classes in Junior High and High School. They remember about the wars that set men free and the price the country paid for that freedom. Sure, the calculations were passed over as just words in a text book, but the teachers did what they could to emphasize the importance of such sacrifice in the face of such enemies. Enemies of Freedom.
And another given, most Americans will tell you with little or no hesitation that their are 50 states in this Union along with a few other territories like American Samoa, Guam, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
But if one were focused and thorough, one would realize that their was a secret state of the Union. Not so much a secret as the word is defined and used today, rather an open and prideful secret. Almost a secret on purpose if so inclined.
This particular secret state of America was legitimately born on May 14, 1948 with a signature from Harry Truman; the then President of the United States of America.
A side dish of History in the Land of God and biblical promises
October 1915-The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence: this was an official agreement between the Arabs of the Middle Eastern Land of Palestine and the British Government. It promised that if the Arabs fought the Turks, then the Arabs would enjoy self-rule.
May 1916-The Sykes-Picot Agreement: this is a proposal that separates the lands of Arabia into pockets that are controlled by the United Kingdom, France, and Russia at the end of World War I. This is identified as a step away from the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence.
November 1917-The Balfour Declaration: this is a document authored by the United Kingdom stating that within the lands identified as Palestine every effort would be taken to establish a homeland for the Jewish people. This is identified as a complete reversal of the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence. This is the beginning of Arab dissent with British officials.
1918-1923: The Russian revolution decimates the Jewish population and forces hundreds of thousands to flee. Over 40,000 Jews arrive in Palestine.
1932-1939: Due to Nazi control in Germany and Europe over 200,000 Jews arrive in Palestine.
1936-1939: Arabs begin to revolt against British rule and Jewish immigrants. This forces the British to begin to change immigration laws pertaining to Jewish population and refugee status.
November 1947: The United Nations officially partition the Palestinian land into two states: one for Jews and one for Arabs. It is rejected by the Arabs on the grounds that the Arab was there first. This triggers a civil war between Jews and Arab forces.
American Exceptionalism Manifested
There have been apologies in perpetuity for the atrocities that took place during the holocaust of World War II. Theory after theory and explanation after explanation have tried in vain to appease those looking for a plausible answer as to why it happened. The conclusion we now have is that there are things we do to each other that cannot be explained and things that cannot be apologized for.
In short, the human is the worst animal this planet will ever suffer to exist.
Those things that took place at Treblinka and Birkenau are too horrific to comprehend beyond the truth that they can never be allowed to be repeated. We, as a specie, cannot allow that kind of cleansing to ever happen again.
This point is never argued. If there is any certainty to history or to our own interpretations, it is to acknowledge this point over and over: the holocaust and anything remotely similar cannot happen again.
So, from this axiom, we must find our savior. We must identify the one who will carry the sword and hold fast the shield and stand at the ready at the walls to guarantee safety for all. We must identify the steward, sentinel, and guardsmen for this dangerous but noble task.
In natural selection, there is nothing unnatural about being the alpha when proof is afforded to the entire kingdom. When their speed, agility, senses, strength, and power set the standard it is their place to operate as they see fit. But when the alpha no longer exhibits those superior traits of brain and brawn what does nature tell us to do with the alpha?
Pathology of being Wrong
Legal: According to the 4th Geneva Convention, the occupation of Palestine by Israel is illegal. The Hague has even ruled against Israel on this matter.
Israel is the number 1 violator of United Nations Security Resolutions. In their defense, the United States has used its veto in the UN security council over forty times when Israel was found at fault as to keep them from being punished.
According to the 4th Geneva Convention, an occupier cannot build roads, walls, checkpoints, or do anything that would place the occupied people in peril. Currently, Israel has built a wall twice as high as the Berlin Wall and 4 times as long in Palestine. It also has over one hundred checkpoints that regulate the movement of Palestinian people from work, school, and medical. These are also all illegal according to the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to restrict the mobility of occupied people.
Since 1967, over 18,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished due to Jewish settlements being built. These settlements are also illegal.
In 2005, Israel finally gave into international law and evacuated settlements in Gaza and dismantled their military presence. This evacuation only made up 2% of the total population of Jews. The Israeli government told each settler that was evacuated that they would receive $227,000 US dollars in order to relocate. The total cost of this venture would be 2.2 billion USD. The Israeli government requested that the United States pay for all of this.
Source: Council on Foreign Relations.
1948-Palestinian Refugee population: 750,000
Today-Palestinian Refugee population: 4.6 million
Source: U.N. High Commission for refugees.
Economic: According to the World Bank, the Palestinian unemployment rate is over 50%. The Palestinian poverty is at 75% which means these people live on $2 a day or less.
Military: The United States sees Israel as a military pawn in the Middle East.
"We consider 30 billion in assistance to Israel as an investment in Peace...through strength".
Nicholas Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs
Source: Congressional Research Service (U.S. aid to Israel)
2007-10 year Military aid agreement signed by George W. Bush which guarantees 10 billion in USD.
2014-Israel is the 5th largest nuclear power in the world with 200 to 300 active nuclear warheads.
2010-Israel number of tanks: 3,930 Israel number of F-16 Jets 362 (second largest fleet behind U.S.)
Palestinian number of tanks: 0 Palestinian number of Jets: 0
Source: Global Security.com
2000-2nd Intifada: The Israeli response was disproportional. According to Palestine Red Crescent Society, in the first ten days 74 Palestinians were killed and another 3,000 were injured. According to Amnesty international the Palestinians were denied medical attention. This is illegal according to the Geneva convention.
September 2000 to February 2007
Palestinians killed by Israelis=4,009
Israelis killed by Palestinians=1,021
Children killed during conflict: Palestinian=816
Israeli=119
Source: B'Tselem.
According to Jeremy Sharp, Congressional Research Service, June 2015
Multi-Tiered Missile Defense Shield includes Iron Dome, David's Sling, Arrow I, Arrow II, and Arrow III. These are all funded and provided for by the United States.
Cash Flow Financing allows Israel to purchase US armaments with "special loans" over an extended time period. This is unique to Military purchases only.
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Cost per plane=2.75 Billion USD
The United States allows Israel to purchase this fighter jet through a 100% FMF grant.
Q.M.E. (Qualitative Military Edge) is a program wherein the United States aids Israel in setting up a defense armament centric economy through arms manufacturing. From 2010 to 2014 Israel was the number 10 exporter of armaments around the world making up 2% of aggregate sales delivered.
Strategic Collaboration: this was a program initiated in the 1980's wherein the United States would secretly stockpile weapons in case of emergencies in Israel. Israel, while attacking Gaza, requested and was awarded access to Hellfire missiles taken directly from this stockpile of emergency weapons. Although there were a few hiccups from congress, the use of the missiles were allowed. But it was made clear that the program was not meant as a "shared" stockpile.
Financial: Israel is acknowledged as dependent upon aid from the United States at home and abroad. Its economy, since its birth, had always been lagging behind its population growth.
1/3 of all aid given out by the United States goes to Israel.
From 1949 to 2006 aid to Israel reached 108 billion. That is 2 to 3 billion a year or 6 to 8 million a day.
Religious: From 1978 to 2006 Pro-Israeli Political Action Committees have contributed $43,724,035 USD to candidates who vote in congress according to The American Israel Public Affairs Committee. This group is based on the beliefs of the fundamentalist Christian. They support Israel per the last book of the bible, Revelations.
Conclusion
To enable someone is only human. It is psychologically unhealthy, but it happens all the time all over the world. The American voter is no different than those in Europe, the Pacific rim, Russia, or even Scandinavia. It doesn't matter where you are from, but it does matter how you behave. It does matter what you apply in your own life.
Imagine you have fallen into a deep pit. We call this deep pit; cliché.
A. Either you stand for or you stand against or you stand in line
B. Either you are the problem or the solution
C. I didn't have anyone to vote for or I didn't want to throw away my vote
D. I am not addicted. I can quit any time.
E. No one can love me the way he can. These bruises and broken collar bone are my fault. I am the one to blame for his drinking. Non one can love me the way he can.
As Israel occupies Palenstinians lands, so to does the United States occupy the world. The connectionism between Israel and America lies within this relationship. The reason Americans support Israel is not to make amends for the atrocities of the Holocaust; it is rather to allow Israel to commit its own kind of Holocaust. As the German blamed the Jew for losing WWI and its German identity, the Jew now blames the Arab for the same.
This post is not anti-Semitic or anti-American. It is simply an observation of a very large group of junkies.
The United States sees itself in Israel. God ordained this land to the Jew as God ordained the world to the American. It is that simple. It is that dangerous.
Occupation is the key to disaster, pain, and suffering. It will be up to the American to evolve beyond such activities as these. As a nation of law, we know that law that is not applied does not exist.
It is now time for the American voter to break away from the pack and break free from their addiction. But only the addict can help the addict.
Either the American can be cool or the American can be right. No junkie can be both. The first step is dealing with reality.
Peace
Thursday, June 2, 2016
To evolve beyond the faction Political Party system
The republicans are doing it. The democrats are doing it. So why not the Libertarians.
I am referring to the movements against the "Ticket Candidates" per convention/primaries.
I respect people who are in motion, and there are conservatives that don't want Trump representing the brand "republican". There are progressives that do not trust Billary Clinton, and therefore are stoking the fires of the Bern. You cannot dismiss these actions. They are not anomalies. These are large groups of people that are taking a stand for principle.
What are the motives of the convention going Libertarians in 2016?
1. Debate inclusion
2. Vote-percentage exemption for immediate ballot access for years to come
3. A possible position on Johnson's campaign team or Judicial committee "consultant"
As Johnson and Weld have already proven to be electable (not as Libertarians), this seems to sway the convention goer to punch their name. It worked for Bob Barr. It would explain such high first ballot numbers. But why?
It is unlikely that the convention goer who supported a Johnson Weld Ticket knew that much about each candidates administration when Governors respectively. Also, many Libertarians libertarians are not fond of the Fair Tax which Johnson has openly endorsed. George Phillies has led the charge with writing a book about the finances of two Libertarian Presidential Candidates which apparently had difficulty running for President and living within there financial means. Phillies work was, IMO, thorough and precise. If the work had been done on other topic, perhaps it would've warranted entry into a peer reviewed journal of academia.
In the study of group think, why do Libertarian convention goers keep voting for carpet baggers that have shown little to no Libertarian ideology in rhetoric, speeches, or actually votes while in office.
The latter is important this year because both President and Vice President have records as Governors. Bob Barr had a record in the House. Many have thrown Johnson's veto history into my face several times as "proof" of his libertarian leanings. I retort by bringing up his non-stance on marijuana law, the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses, his willingness to support market-based school systems, and his length in office. Johnson served two terms, was termed out, and could've done many things in his final term as Governor to "prove" his Libertarian mind and heart.
All of the above rambling comes to a single point: the Libertarian convention goer is desperate. I don't believe that ALL convention goers who voted for Johnson Weld believe that they are pure or hard core Libertarian. They believe they are libertarian at some level (with no actual proof beyond emotivism), and this seems to warrant a vote for each. The Libertarian Convention goer projects their own belief system onto these candidates and then cocoons in denial until the convention vote is finished.
Bob Barr was a drug warrior while in the House. Weld has a track record for gun control. So here, one can deduce that the convention goer cares about one thing above all else: electability or past public service.
The Libertarian convention goer does not represent the entire Libertarian movement in America. It is a poor sampling of a niche market of Freedom loving humans set on Individual sovereignty. The convention goer had the time, means, and the logistics to attend.
It is my belief that if the Libertarian Party functioned as the other parties and ran primaries or caucuses in each state the vote totals would be much different. One could make an argument that in this day of technology that an online internet conference of registered delegates could easily vote for their candidate as did the convention goer. State Chairs and state committees could validate each online delegate and the elections could run just as they are now.
But why has the Libertarian refrained from innovating and open range voting system for President/Vice President? Answer. It is much easier to manipulate a thousand rather than a million.
Blog post Disclosure:
1996...I voted for Browne
2000...I voted for Browne and aided his campaign
2004...Protest year. I didn't vote as I supported Caruso
2008...I wrote in NOTA which in Missouri made my ballot void
2012...I wrote in NOTA which in Missouri made my ballot void
The Libertarian convention goer is an addict. I will not enable them.
If a Johnson Weld ticket offends your principles, why not a "Never Johnson" campaign? Simple. The Libertarian is desperate.
I am referring to the movements against the "Ticket Candidates" per convention/primaries.
I respect people who are in motion, and there are conservatives that don't want Trump representing the brand "republican". There are progressives that do not trust Billary Clinton, and therefore are stoking the fires of the Bern. You cannot dismiss these actions. They are not anomalies. These are large groups of people that are taking a stand for principle.
What are the motives of the convention going Libertarians in 2016?
1. Debate inclusion
2. Vote-percentage exemption for immediate ballot access for years to come
3. A possible position on Johnson's campaign team or Judicial committee "consultant"
As Johnson and Weld have already proven to be electable (not as Libertarians), this seems to sway the convention goer to punch their name. It worked for Bob Barr. It would explain such high first ballot numbers. But why?
It is unlikely that the convention goer who supported a Johnson Weld Ticket knew that much about each candidates administration when Governors respectively. Also, many Libertarians libertarians are not fond of the Fair Tax which Johnson has openly endorsed. George Phillies has led the charge with writing a book about the finances of two Libertarian Presidential Candidates which apparently had difficulty running for President and living within there financial means. Phillies work was, IMO, thorough and precise. If the work had been done on other topic, perhaps it would've warranted entry into a peer reviewed journal of academia.
In the study of group think, why do Libertarian convention goers keep voting for carpet baggers that have shown little to no Libertarian ideology in rhetoric, speeches, or actually votes while in office.
The latter is important this year because both President and Vice President have records as Governors. Bob Barr had a record in the House. Many have thrown Johnson's veto history into my face several times as "proof" of his libertarian leanings. I retort by bringing up his non-stance on marijuana law, the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses, his willingness to support market-based school systems, and his length in office. Johnson served two terms, was termed out, and could've done many things in his final term as Governor to "prove" his Libertarian mind and heart.
All of the above rambling comes to a single point: the Libertarian convention goer is desperate. I don't believe that ALL convention goers who voted for Johnson Weld believe that they are pure or hard core Libertarian. They believe they are libertarian at some level (with no actual proof beyond emotivism), and this seems to warrant a vote for each. The Libertarian Convention goer projects their own belief system onto these candidates and then cocoons in denial until the convention vote is finished.
Bob Barr was a drug warrior while in the House. Weld has a track record for gun control. So here, one can deduce that the convention goer cares about one thing above all else: electability or past public service.
The Libertarian convention goer does not represent the entire Libertarian movement in America. It is a poor sampling of a niche market of Freedom loving humans set on Individual sovereignty. The convention goer had the time, means, and the logistics to attend.
It is my belief that if the Libertarian Party functioned as the other parties and ran primaries or caucuses in each state the vote totals would be much different. One could make an argument that in this day of technology that an online internet conference of registered delegates could easily vote for their candidate as did the convention goer. State Chairs and state committees could validate each online delegate and the elections could run just as they are now.
But why has the Libertarian refrained from innovating and open range voting system for President/Vice President? Answer. It is much easier to manipulate a thousand rather than a million.
Blog post Disclosure:
1996...I voted for Browne
2000...I voted for Browne and aided his campaign
2004...Protest year. I didn't vote as I supported Caruso
2008...I wrote in NOTA which in Missouri made my ballot void
2012...I wrote in NOTA which in Missouri made my ballot void
The Libertarian convention goer is an addict. I will not enable them.
If a Johnson Weld ticket offends your principles, why not a "Never Johnson" campaign? Simple. The Libertarian is desperate.
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Industrial Hemp: a win for all Americans
US Presidential write-in candidate Steven Wilson will be hosting "Capitol Hemp Day" on March 16th at the Capitol in Jefferson City. Capitol Hemp Day will run from 9am to 3pm and will be held on the third floor rotunda on the Senate side.
Candidate Wilson is the founder of the Missouri Hemp Network and has held several events in support of Industrial Hemp around the state of Missouri.
Volunteers and Donations are needed.
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6847TEPL769ZW
Candidate Wilson have on display many products made from Industrial Hemp which include: Dr Bronner's Magic soap, Manitoba Harvest Hemp seeds, Body lotion, particle board, ceiling board, clothing, and bast/hurd fiber samples.
The event is free and open to the public.
There are two house bills currently in support of Industrial Hemp farming. There is one Senate bill in committee.
You may contact candidate Wilson by phone 573-416-0075
http://stevenwilson2016.weebly.com/
Peace in 2016 and beyond.
Candidate Wilson is the founder of the Missouri Hemp Network and has held several events in support of Industrial Hemp around the state of Missouri.
Volunteers and Donations are needed.
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6847TEPL769ZW
Candidate Wilson have on display many products made from Industrial Hemp which include: Dr Bronner's Magic soap, Manitoba Harvest Hemp seeds, Body lotion, particle board, ceiling board, clothing, and bast/hurd fiber samples.
The event is free and open to the public.
There are two house bills currently in support of Industrial Hemp farming. There is one Senate bill in committee.
You may contact candidate Wilson by phone 573-416-0075
http://stevenwilson2016.weebly.com/
Peace in 2016 and beyond.
Sunday, January 24, 2016
The evolution into a stateless citizenry
Throughout the world each society has days they celebrate each year. These dates can be national, religious, or personal. I shall focus on the birthday. This celebration is probably celebrated even in the most remote parts of the world. It is now time to celebrate another kind of birth: the birth of a stateless person.
July 5, 1998
The day after our nation's birthday: it is the apex of our summer calendar year. It is filled with picnics, festivals, carnivals, live music, dancing, street fairs, cotton candy, dunking machines, ice cream waffle cones, and of course the night dance of fireworks across this great land. It is and will always define the American summer, especially for the young.
But I have something else in mind. The day after our nation's birthday set eighteen years ago this year will celebrate something completely American: a stateless birth.
I can understand that a blog post may seem inadequate to explain such an idea, but even in brevity the main aspects of the principle should be approachable by all.
I begin first by saying that this is not a turning away, but rather, a turning towards. It is the next step.
The criteria are quite simple. If a person has not become a naturalized citizen or is a first-generation birthed American, then they will be categorized as a stateless person.
Now, this name of a stateless person may at first put people off. The term, I assure you, has no intention of being derogatory towards the owner of the name. It is simply a status of citizenship. Nothing more.
The name does not imply coward, anarchist, criminal, saint, or anything else in political speak. It is just a status.
All people that do meet this criteria are known legally as stateless while they are in America. If they return to their country of origin they will regain citizenship from that country. Being categorized as stateless does not imply anything about their own personal traits. This category is based in legality which will in turn affect their status here in America only.
How?
1. A stateless person will not have access to any social programs offered by any city, county, state, or territory of America.
2. A stateless person will not have access to a civilian court or attorney.
3. A stateless person must register with the United States Navy.
4. A stateless person must pay an annual stateless fee of 2.5% of the Median Household Income based on the state in which they reside each year. If they reside in multiple states during a fiscal year, then the stateless person will pay the state with the highest MHI.
Example: Arizona MHI: $48,621 in 2012
48,621 X .025= 1,216 (rounded up)
The stateless person residing in Arizona must pay the US Navy $1,216 USD upon entry into America. It is not pro-rated. The fiscal year is January 1 through December 31. It does not matter when the person arrives. They will pay the same amount of $1, 216.00 USD.
If the stateless person remains in Arizona for a second year without leaving America, then the stateless fee will be due July 5 of that year. If they leave and decide to return to America, they again must pay the fee upon entry. No exceptions. If the person leaves and returns multiple times in a fiscal year they will pay the same amount for each entry.
5. The United States Navy will deposit the funds into a special account in the Federal Reserve the first year the stateless person arrives. Subsequent payments will be split 50/50 between the Federal Reserve and the state in which the stateless person resides.
6. This fee cannot be paid by a sponsor or third party. The United States Navy will trace the funds to their origin. If there is any attempt to commit fraud, then the US Navy will charge the person with treason. If found guilty, they will be held in a military prison until their execution.
7. A stateless person will operate while in America in a fee-based system. This means that if the person calls the police, fire rescue, paramedics, or any other agency, they must pay for that service. The fee scale will be set and maintained by the US Navy.
8. A stateless person cannot vote.
Now, if a person is a legacy (a person with at least two generations of family born in America) they have the stateless option as well. Upon their 18th birthday the person fills out an application for stateless status for the US Navy. This application is a declaration that surrenders their citizenship. This application has a 12 month holding period wherein the person has the ability to withdraw the application with no reciprocity. After the holding period the person must "interview" with the US Navy for American citizenship reinstatement. The fee for this reinstatement is: MHI x 5.
Example: Illinois $57, 444 in 2014
57,444 x 5=287,220
Once a person is stateless, any offspring from any relationship will be deemed stateless by birth in America. If they child is born in another country American authorities will adhere to the law of that country in regards to citizenship.
Upon their 18th birthday, any stateless children will have the right to apply for citizenship in America. The fee for this application will be: MHI x 10.
Example: South Carolina $43,916 in 2012
43,916 x 10=439,160
The dossier of a stateless person.
A. No stateless person can be arrested or detained by local or state law enforcement.
B. No stateless person shall be forced to pay any monetary fee or membership outside the stateless fee they pay to the US Navy.
C. No stateless person shall pay any personal property tax or income tax at any level of government.
D. A stateless person may serve their domain in any capacity they see fit. For example: jury duty, volunteer fire department, or military service.
The stateless person will communicate their status by carrying a US Naval ID tag. Any country currently in a trade agreement with America shall honor this US Naval ID tag when or if the stateless person travels abroad. This ID tag will replace any other currently used documentation like a passport.
It is possible I may have missed a point or two. I am sure people reading this will have questions. The people I have discussed this idea with certainly had questions. I have made every attempt to manage the answers to keep them as simple as possible.
By no means is this a cure or device directed towards immigration. This idea is not a solution to immigration, because I do not see immigration as a problem. To establish clarity for the reader: this is a solution to the modern issue of ownership by domain.
I am simply trying to solve the conundrum of: does a country own you or do you own your country? Do rights belong to a person or to a geographic location?
It is time to accept the natural evolution. It is time to acknowledge truth. It is time to evolve beyond positive and negative rights.
We have no control over what monsters darken our doorway, but we do have the ability to choose how we respond to them. Don't be afraid. This is just the next step.
Peace
July 5, 1998
The day after our nation's birthday: it is the apex of our summer calendar year. It is filled with picnics, festivals, carnivals, live music, dancing, street fairs, cotton candy, dunking machines, ice cream waffle cones, and of course the night dance of fireworks across this great land. It is and will always define the American summer, especially for the young.
But I have something else in mind. The day after our nation's birthday set eighteen years ago this year will celebrate something completely American: a stateless birth.
I can understand that a blog post may seem inadequate to explain such an idea, but even in brevity the main aspects of the principle should be approachable by all.
I begin first by saying that this is not a turning away, but rather, a turning towards. It is the next step.
The criteria are quite simple. If a person has not become a naturalized citizen or is a first-generation birthed American, then they will be categorized as a stateless person.
Now, this name of a stateless person may at first put people off. The term, I assure you, has no intention of being derogatory towards the owner of the name. It is simply a status of citizenship. Nothing more.
The name does not imply coward, anarchist, criminal, saint, or anything else in political speak. It is just a status.
All people that do meet this criteria are known legally as stateless while they are in America. If they return to their country of origin they will regain citizenship from that country. Being categorized as stateless does not imply anything about their own personal traits. This category is based in legality which will in turn affect their status here in America only.
How?
1. A stateless person will not have access to any social programs offered by any city, county, state, or territory of America.
2. A stateless person will not have access to a civilian court or attorney.
3. A stateless person must register with the United States Navy.
4. A stateless person must pay an annual stateless fee of 2.5% of the Median Household Income based on the state in which they reside each year. If they reside in multiple states during a fiscal year, then the stateless person will pay the state with the highest MHI.
Example: Arizona MHI: $48,621 in 2012
48,621 X .025= 1,216 (rounded up)
The stateless person residing in Arizona must pay the US Navy $1,216 USD upon entry into America. It is not pro-rated. The fiscal year is January 1 through December 31. It does not matter when the person arrives. They will pay the same amount of $1, 216.00 USD.
If the stateless person remains in Arizona for a second year without leaving America, then the stateless fee will be due July 5 of that year. If they leave and decide to return to America, they again must pay the fee upon entry. No exceptions. If the person leaves and returns multiple times in a fiscal year they will pay the same amount for each entry.
5. The United States Navy will deposit the funds into a special account in the Federal Reserve the first year the stateless person arrives. Subsequent payments will be split 50/50 between the Federal Reserve and the state in which the stateless person resides.
6. This fee cannot be paid by a sponsor or third party. The United States Navy will trace the funds to their origin. If there is any attempt to commit fraud, then the US Navy will charge the person with treason. If found guilty, they will be held in a military prison until their execution.
7. A stateless person will operate while in America in a fee-based system. This means that if the person calls the police, fire rescue, paramedics, or any other agency, they must pay for that service. The fee scale will be set and maintained by the US Navy.
8. A stateless person cannot vote.
Now, if a person is a legacy (a person with at least two generations of family born in America) they have the stateless option as well. Upon their 18th birthday the person fills out an application for stateless status for the US Navy. This application is a declaration that surrenders their citizenship. This application has a 12 month holding period wherein the person has the ability to withdraw the application with no reciprocity. After the holding period the person must "interview" with the US Navy for American citizenship reinstatement. The fee for this reinstatement is: MHI x 5.
Example: Illinois $57, 444 in 2014
57,444 x 5=287,220
Once a person is stateless, any offspring from any relationship will be deemed stateless by birth in America. If they child is born in another country American authorities will adhere to the law of that country in regards to citizenship.
Upon their 18th birthday, any stateless children will have the right to apply for citizenship in America. The fee for this application will be: MHI x 10.
Example: South Carolina $43,916 in 2012
43,916 x 10=439,160
The dossier of a stateless person.
A. No stateless person can be arrested or detained by local or state law enforcement.
B. No stateless person shall be forced to pay any monetary fee or membership outside the stateless fee they pay to the US Navy.
C. No stateless person shall pay any personal property tax or income tax at any level of government.
D. A stateless person may serve their domain in any capacity they see fit. For example: jury duty, volunteer fire department, or military service.
The stateless person will communicate their status by carrying a US Naval ID tag. Any country currently in a trade agreement with America shall honor this US Naval ID tag when or if the stateless person travels abroad. This ID tag will replace any other currently used documentation like a passport.
It is possible I may have missed a point or two. I am sure people reading this will have questions. The people I have discussed this idea with certainly had questions. I have made every attempt to manage the answers to keep them as simple as possible.
By no means is this a cure or device directed towards immigration. This idea is not a solution to immigration, because I do not see immigration as a problem. To establish clarity for the reader: this is a solution to the modern issue of ownership by domain.
I am simply trying to solve the conundrum of: does a country own you or do you own your country? Do rights belong to a person or to a geographic location?
It is time to accept the natural evolution. It is time to acknowledge truth. It is time to evolve beyond positive and negative rights.
We have no control over what monsters darken our doorway, but we do have the ability to choose how we respond to them. Don't be afraid. This is just the next step.
Peace
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Abortion: the utility of a procedure
Legal
Ethical
Philosophical
Medical
Religious
Economical
Political
Abortion may be one of the few topics in modern history that touches all of the above categories. It is the most divisive political issue of our time. And yet, it appears to me, that even though many have opinions about abortion, there seems a void left inside, deep deep inside.
What is the utility of the abortion?
There is a innate dilemma with all innovation: intention versus application. The human has learned the hard way that once something is invented it is almost impossible to remove it.
This debate can be dealt with immediately or it can be delayed indefinitely. But what we do know is that it is always present. The innovation cannot be uninnovated. That would be unnatural, because we assume that the innovation was part of natural law. We assume that the human evolved to a point wherein existing forms just didn't work anymore. It is not a failure on any one person, but rather the proof that as creatures of cognition we can create things that are deemed necessary by a certain population, but may not be deemed necessary by the entire population. Now the game has begun.
If one assumes it is to simply get rid of the proof of intercourse, then abortion, as any reaction would be, stands as a deterrent. By that I mean, if humans thought abortions were so terrible, they would be used as a threat. But the death penalty has not stopped acts of murder or rape. Having access to a Nuclear device has not stopped war. Thusly, the stigma of abortions has not kept men and women from fornicating and feeling the need to avoid the natural consequence (parenting) of that act.
Here, we must note that abortion is not independent, but dependent of another act. Not just anyone can have an abortion. The medical procedure is gender specific and also requires certain acts to take place prior to the abortion. Firstly, a man and a woman must have intercourse. Secondly, the sperm must fertilize an egg. Thirdly, a decision by the woman or the couple must be made about the intercourse and its consequence called pregnancy. This pregnancy will result in the birth of another human being. As a creature of cognition; both the male and the female know from prior knowledge (social or family) that once a parent, always a parent. The responsibilities include: financial, emotional, physical, and mental.
Fourth, in order for the woman or couple to contemplate the abortion, they must first have access to the medical procedure. This access would be rated as easy to impossible. The woman or couple would measure the risk versus the reward. The risk would be defined as the possiblity of becoming a parent when the human does not want to be a parent. The reward would be defind as the end result of the abortion would remove the possibility of becoming a parent for that particular singular act of fornication.
Fifth, and this may be the most difficult, what was gained by the abortion? Did it set the female and male free from their own preconceived notion of the burden of parenthood? What about loss?
A. If the fetus would've gone full term, then perhaps that human would've studied oncology. And in doing so invented a treatment which would've led to a cure for cancer.
B. If the fetus goes full term, but this time the human is a cashier at a gas station. One Saturday night, over a fight in the parking lot, the cashier gets shot at the age of 23. The world still turns and it is indifferent.
C. If the fetus goes full term and the human manifests "troubles" early on. As the human ages more "troubles" take place until the human, at the age of 27, has now raped 11 different women in four states.
If sex is a singular act then we must be willing to acknowledge the multiple outcomes of that birth. Because we cannot say with any certainty about that birth, it is irrational to speak of the conception or the end the pregnancy.
No one has sex knowing what the outcome will be. A couple may be "planning" a family by monitoring her monthly cycle, but those couples never entertained the procedure called abortion. It would defeat the purpose of all the planning. One cannot have a family if they continue to abort the fetus after conception.
A libertarian, a green, a male, a female, a catholic, an atheist, and all the rest that take it to task to name a position to their own belief structure; as if the name itself warrants serious thought and consideration, justify by believing that their own belief is the proper belief. Once this is accomplished, then all further discussions of logic and reason are off. The topic, for them, is closed.
If someone wants to have sex, then they know there is a chance of a pregnancy. They also know there is a chance of a STD. A woman can be frigid in the same manner a man can be limp. Both genders can be barren or unable to procreate. But science has solved many of these problems. And these solutions have generally been accepted by the society as a whole. Of course, there are minor groups that refuse to acknowledge these solutions or have taken staunch positions to the counter. Regardless, the human seems to allow a double standard with these medical procedures. I believe it stems from the use of one word: medical.
I solve this small dilemma by saying simply that if a procedure effects the human body which alters the course of the human's life, then it is medical.
There are treatments for most STDs. There are medications for erectile and libido issues. There also remains old school devices as abstinence and condoms.
No matter how far you go with this discussion, everyone deciding here must answer the simple question: what is the utility of the abortion?
You must first engage the cause before you set values to the effects. When you say abortion is murder, you do so by offending the logical matrix meant for ontology. In that same pathology, if you believe abortion is murder, then you must also see masturbation as murder. You could also say something like: "Any sexual activity that ends with null children is deemed an unnatural act."
You could base all of your beliefs on such a statement. But does it deal with reality or an idealism. You put the human in a place they don't belong.
If a woman owns her body which includes her womb, then a man owns his sperm; but by themselves, the egg and the sperm, are just two separate entities. It is only when joined that they create something. It is the creation of the "something" that belongs to being which belongs to ontology. When a woman gets pregnant, we know that she will give birth to a human. There is no speculation about her giving birth to a toaster or a love seat or a sports car. It is a natural course of events which can be interrupted by the procedure which makes that outcome disappear.
So what does it say about a society that would invent a procedure that seems so condemned and yet utilized every year? What does it say about American's humanity?
Your passions and your reason cannot maneuver around this unless you are purposely avoiding the task of answering the question.
Abortion is nothing but a medical procedure which cannot be uninvented. No one has used atomic weapons since WW2 but we know they still exist as well as the act of violence known as war.
Abortion is to deal with the consequences of an act. When you make it more than this you insult the intellect of everyone else. You use emotivism because it makes you feel good or important as if your post will end the discussion in a virtual eureka.
Abortion is a topic born never to be answered collectively. Roe versus Wade has not addressed any of the categories listed at the top of this post beyond that of legal.
Being is a topic that will never be solved as it is not a problem. It belongs to a realm that is both timeless and without reference. It belongs to philosophy and there it has a place and a home. It is to be discussed by everyone generation that follows, but it can never be answered completely without severe consequence to us all.
The reason abortion is so divisive is due to the fact that it is marketed as a solution to a problem: abortion is murder.
But the pregnancy is not a problem. The conception is not a problem. The end of a pregnancy is not a problem. We manufacture a problem as to implement the solution.
A woman can suffer a miscarriage. Is that grounds for a manslaughter charge? What if we have proof she consumed alcohol? What if we know she smoked cigarettes until her last tri-mester? Would you have grounds for child abuse or assault?
You can promote adoption but you can't make it fool proof. There are thousands of case studies in MSW programs to prove that pedophiles got into foster care programs in America. There are also cases wherein a couple took in children for the monthly check. Are these circumstances grounds for saying you are pro-birth rather than pro-life?
You can force a woman to give birth, but you can't force her to be a parent. You can't force the male to be part of the child's life. You argue rights as if natural law has something to do with creation.
The medical procedure of abortion is a test of everyone's metaphysical aptitude. In the end, I have found it to be about control...from both sides of the argument.
My final thought revolves around the psychological term cognition. The fetus simply has no means of currently communiticating its own wants and desires. The outsider has made that decision for them as if they were already a human child and you were acting as a parent or guardian. But the fetus is not a human child with cognition. This again belongs to ontology as it deals with eventuality. If the fetus goes full term, eventually a human child will be born. And as a child cannot make adult decisions legally in America, we find ourselves once again going back to the female and male fornicators. They shared one thing they both own, and now face an eventual outcome that is not in question.
What is the utility of abortion?
Let each decide that for themselves. Let each find peace in their minds and their hearts.
No force necessary.
Ethical
Philosophical
Medical
Religious
Economical
Political
Abortion may be one of the few topics in modern history that touches all of the above categories. It is the most divisive political issue of our time. And yet, it appears to me, that even though many have opinions about abortion, there seems a void left inside, deep deep inside.
What is the utility of the abortion?
There is a innate dilemma with all innovation: intention versus application. The human has learned the hard way that once something is invented it is almost impossible to remove it.
This debate can be dealt with immediately or it can be delayed indefinitely. But what we do know is that it is always present. The innovation cannot be uninnovated. That would be unnatural, because we assume that the innovation was part of natural law. We assume that the human evolved to a point wherein existing forms just didn't work anymore. It is not a failure on any one person, but rather the proof that as creatures of cognition we can create things that are deemed necessary by a certain population, but may not be deemed necessary by the entire population. Now the game has begun.
If one assumes it is to simply get rid of the proof of intercourse, then abortion, as any reaction would be, stands as a deterrent. By that I mean, if humans thought abortions were so terrible, they would be used as a threat. But the death penalty has not stopped acts of murder or rape. Having access to a Nuclear device has not stopped war. Thusly, the stigma of abortions has not kept men and women from fornicating and feeling the need to avoid the natural consequence (parenting) of that act.
Here, we must note that abortion is not independent, but dependent of another act. Not just anyone can have an abortion. The medical procedure is gender specific and also requires certain acts to take place prior to the abortion. Firstly, a man and a woman must have intercourse. Secondly, the sperm must fertilize an egg. Thirdly, a decision by the woman or the couple must be made about the intercourse and its consequence called pregnancy. This pregnancy will result in the birth of another human being. As a creature of cognition; both the male and the female know from prior knowledge (social or family) that once a parent, always a parent. The responsibilities include: financial, emotional, physical, and mental.
Fourth, in order for the woman or couple to contemplate the abortion, they must first have access to the medical procedure. This access would be rated as easy to impossible. The woman or couple would measure the risk versus the reward. The risk would be defined as the possiblity of becoming a parent when the human does not want to be a parent. The reward would be defind as the end result of the abortion would remove the possibility of becoming a parent for that particular singular act of fornication.
Fifth, and this may be the most difficult, what was gained by the abortion? Did it set the female and male free from their own preconceived notion of the burden of parenthood? What about loss?
A. If the fetus would've gone full term, then perhaps that human would've studied oncology. And in doing so invented a treatment which would've led to a cure for cancer.
B. If the fetus goes full term, but this time the human is a cashier at a gas station. One Saturday night, over a fight in the parking lot, the cashier gets shot at the age of 23. The world still turns and it is indifferent.
C. If the fetus goes full term and the human manifests "troubles" early on. As the human ages more "troubles" take place until the human, at the age of 27, has now raped 11 different women in four states.
If sex is a singular act then we must be willing to acknowledge the multiple outcomes of that birth. Because we cannot say with any certainty about that birth, it is irrational to speak of the conception or the end the pregnancy.
No one has sex knowing what the outcome will be. A couple may be "planning" a family by monitoring her monthly cycle, but those couples never entertained the procedure called abortion. It would defeat the purpose of all the planning. One cannot have a family if they continue to abort the fetus after conception.
A libertarian, a green, a male, a female, a catholic, an atheist, and all the rest that take it to task to name a position to their own belief structure; as if the name itself warrants serious thought and consideration, justify by believing that their own belief is the proper belief. Once this is accomplished, then all further discussions of logic and reason are off. The topic, for them, is closed.
If someone wants to have sex, then they know there is a chance of a pregnancy. They also know there is a chance of a STD. A woman can be frigid in the same manner a man can be limp. Both genders can be barren or unable to procreate. But science has solved many of these problems. And these solutions have generally been accepted by the society as a whole. Of course, there are minor groups that refuse to acknowledge these solutions or have taken staunch positions to the counter. Regardless, the human seems to allow a double standard with these medical procedures. I believe it stems from the use of one word: medical.
I solve this small dilemma by saying simply that if a procedure effects the human body which alters the course of the human's life, then it is medical.
There are treatments for most STDs. There are medications for erectile and libido issues. There also remains old school devices as abstinence and condoms.
No matter how far you go with this discussion, everyone deciding here must answer the simple question: what is the utility of the abortion?
You must first engage the cause before you set values to the effects. When you say abortion is murder, you do so by offending the logical matrix meant for ontology. In that same pathology, if you believe abortion is murder, then you must also see masturbation as murder. You could also say something like: "Any sexual activity that ends with null children is deemed an unnatural act."
You could base all of your beliefs on such a statement. But does it deal with reality or an idealism. You put the human in a place they don't belong.
If a woman owns her body which includes her womb, then a man owns his sperm; but by themselves, the egg and the sperm, are just two separate entities. It is only when joined that they create something. It is the creation of the "something" that belongs to being which belongs to ontology. When a woman gets pregnant, we know that she will give birth to a human. There is no speculation about her giving birth to a toaster or a love seat or a sports car. It is a natural course of events which can be interrupted by the procedure which makes that outcome disappear.
So what does it say about a society that would invent a procedure that seems so condemned and yet utilized every year? What does it say about American's humanity?
Your passions and your reason cannot maneuver around this unless you are purposely avoiding the task of answering the question.
Abortion is nothing but a medical procedure which cannot be uninvented. No one has used atomic weapons since WW2 but we know they still exist as well as the act of violence known as war.
Abortion is to deal with the consequences of an act. When you make it more than this you insult the intellect of everyone else. You use emotivism because it makes you feel good or important as if your post will end the discussion in a virtual eureka.
Abortion is a topic born never to be answered collectively. Roe versus Wade has not addressed any of the categories listed at the top of this post beyond that of legal.
Being is a topic that will never be solved as it is not a problem. It belongs to a realm that is both timeless and without reference. It belongs to philosophy and there it has a place and a home. It is to be discussed by everyone generation that follows, but it can never be answered completely without severe consequence to us all.
The reason abortion is so divisive is due to the fact that it is marketed as a solution to a problem: abortion is murder.
But the pregnancy is not a problem. The conception is not a problem. The end of a pregnancy is not a problem. We manufacture a problem as to implement the solution.
A woman can suffer a miscarriage. Is that grounds for a manslaughter charge? What if we have proof she consumed alcohol? What if we know she smoked cigarettes until her last tri-mester? Would you have grounds for child abuse or assault?
You can promote adoption but you can't make it fool proof. There are thousands of case studies in MSW programs to prove that pedophiles got into foster care programs in America. There are also cases wherein a couple took in children for the monthly check. Are these circumstances grounds for saying you are pro-birth rather than pro-life?
You can force a woman to give birth, but you can't force her to be a parent. You can't force the male to be part of the child's life. You argue rights as if natural law has something to do with creation.
The medical procedure of abortion is a test of everyone's metaphysical aptitude. In the end, I have found it to be about control...from both sides of the argument.
My final thought revolves around the psychological term cognition. The fetus simply has no means of currently communiticating its own wants and desires. The outsider has made that decision for them as if they were already a human child and you were acting as a parent or guardian. But the fetus is not a human child with cognition. This again belongs to ontology as it deals with eventuality. If the fetus goes full term, eventually a human child will be born. And as a child cannot make adult decisions legally in America, we find ourselves once again going back to the female and male fornicators. They shared one thing they both own, and now face an eventual outcome that is not in question.
What is the utility of abortion?
Let each decide that for themselves. Let each find peace in their minds and their hearts.
No force necessary.
Sunday, December 6, 2015
Certificate of Birth Deposit
This video was made during my last congressional race in response to voters asking for possible solutions to Social Security and other social safety net programs. The video is just one possible solution. It runs fairly long and has some volume issues. You might need to wear headphones and have the volume up full to hear it.
As always, feel free to comment. Also, please remember this was in response to voters.
As always, feel free to comment. Also, please remember this was in response to voters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)